A.D. 1842.]

SIR ROBERT PEEL'S NEW CORN LAW.

with the very spirit of Christianity." This conference, which extended over an entire week of meetings, held both morning and evening, was attended by nearly 700 ministers. Their proceedings filled an entire volume, and attracted considerable attention throughout the kingdom. Similar conferences were afterwards held in a great number of towns.

In the face of such facts, it was clear that something must be done, even by a Protectionist Ministry, to diminish the effect of the growing belief that bad legislation was at the bottom of the country's difficulties. In the spring, men had looked eagerly for the budget of

571

came the meeting of Parliament, at which the Queen in person read the speech prepared by her Ministers. It acknowledged with deep regret "the continued distress in the manufacturing districts," and that the sufferings and privations which had resulted from it had been "borne with exemplary patience and forbearance." Finally, Her Majesty recommended to the consideration of both Houses "the laws which affect the import of corn and other articles." What was the intention of the Ministers was not then known; but it was already understood that, unlike their rivals, who had proposed a fixed duty, the new Government would attempt some

the new Ministry. It had been bitterly remarked that | modification of the sliding scale. In the account of at the time when Parliament was prorogued, there were these transactions, which Sir Robert Peel left to be nearly 21,000 persons in Leeds whose average earnings published by his executors after his death, he says:were only 11 d. per week-that in one district in Man- " One of the first acts of the Government over which I chester alone a gentleman had visited 258 families, con- presided (the Government of August, 1841) was to sisting of 1,029 individuals, whose average earnings were propose a material change in the corn law of 1828. only 74d. per head a week; and that while millions were I brought the subject under the consideration of in this deplorable condition, the duty on wheat stood at my colleagues by means of written memoranda, in 248. 8d. a quarter; and Sir Robert Peel and his col- preference to proposals made verbally. In the first leagues demanded four months' leisure at their country of these memoranda, I recommend my colleagues abodes before they would permit the Legislature to take to undertake the revision of the corn laws of 1828, the distress of the people into consideration. At length as an act of the Government. In the second, after

I had procured their assent to the principle of revision, I submit a proposal in respect to the extent to which such revision should be carried, and to the details of the new law." Then were seen the first symptoms of that estrangement from his party which reached its climax in 1846. Glaring as was the necessity for change, and evident as it was, even to the body of the landowners, that they must choose between the mild reform of Peel and the more objectionable measure of his antagonists, there were members of the Cabinet who would still have held out for no concession. The Duke of Buckingham retired from the Ministry, and the Duke of Richmond refused to allow his son to move the address.

been done, and the House having resolved itself into a committee to consider the laws relating to corn, Sir Robert Peel proceeded to explain the measure which he was about to introduce for their modification. "His manner," says one of the newspapers of the time, "was anxious, uneasy. We never saw him address the House with so little confidence." The reception of the Premier's statement was not flattering. Listened to in watchful silence till he unfolded the details of the new sliding scale, he was then hailed from the Opposition benches with shouts of triumphant derision. The Whigs were relieved at finding that at least his measure was not calculated to be more popular out of doors than the fixed duty which they had proposed; but from his own side Sir Robert received little support. His customary cheerers were mute, and round him were black faces when he spoke of not wishing corn prices to range higher than 54s. to 58s. Towards the close of his speech there was a painful inattention, to which he could not refrain from alluding. The dead silence which prevailed while he was reading the proposed scale was followed, when he had concluded, by a great deal of laughter along the line of the Opposition benches, and a loud buzz of conversation on both sides of the House ensued, which did not quite subside during the remainder of the speech. The details of the measure were recapitulated by the Minister as follows:

The statement of the Ministerial measure on the corn laws was fixed for the 9th of February, and the freetraders were prepared for the occasion. A great gathering of deputies from conferences and anti-corn-law associations took place in London, comprising, with metropolitan delegates, nearly 600 persons. The Minister, in a letter to the secretary of the delegation, had declined to see them as a deputation; but their presence became known to him in another way. On the morning of the debate, the whole of the deputies walked in procession to the House of Commons. The spectacle of nearly 600 gentlemen, walking arm-in-arm to the House, caused considerable excitement. Arrived at the entrance, their request to be admitted into the lobby was refused, "When corn is at 59s., and under 60s., the duty at and the delegates were somewhat roughly treated by the present is 27s. 8d. When corn is between those prices, police. Still undaunted, however, they ranged them- the duty I propose is 13s. When the price of corn is at selves on each side of the door leading to the lobby, 50s. the existing duty is 36s. 8d., increasing as the price and saluted the members as they passed with cries falls; instead of which I propose, when corn is at 50s. of "Cheap food!" "A total repeal!" and the like. They that the duty shall only be 20s., and that that duty shall then retreated to Palace Yard, where one of their body, in no case be exceeded. At 56s. the existing duty is mounting to an elevated situation, addressed his fellows 30s. 8d.; the duty I propose at that price is 16s. At with the words: "The doors of the lobby are closed 60s. the existing duty is 26s. 8d.; the duty I propose at against us by the order of those in power. It is im- that price is 12s. At 63s. the existing duty is 23s. 8d.; possible for us to get in to address the members as they the duty I propose is 9s. At 64s. the existing duty is pass. The Corn Laws were passed under the protection 22s. 8d.; the duty I propose is 8s. At 70s. the existing of the bayonet, and the Tories now ensconce themselves duty is 10s. 8d.; the duty I propose is 5s. Therefore it behind the truncheons of the police. But the time is is impossible to deny, on comparing the duty which I fast coming when the voice of the people will be heard, propose with that which exists at present, that it will and their oppressors will quail before it. Let us give cause a very considerable decrease of the protection three hearty cheers for the cause of free trade." The which the present duty affords to the home grower, a cheers were given, and the deputies proceeded up Par- decrease, however, which in my opinion can be made liament Street. At the entrance to Privy Gardens they consistently with justice to all the interests concerned." met Sir Robert Peel coming in his carriage to the House. He appeared, it is said, to think at first that the crowd were about to cheer him ; but at the loud shouts of "No Corn Law!" "Down with monopoly!" "Give us bread and labour!" he leaned back in his carriage, grave and pale. In the House the excitement was considerable. It was filled in every part long before the usual time of commencing business. Below the bar were seen a number of distinguished strangers, among whom was the Duke of Cambridge. At five o'clock the Ministers moved that the paragraph in the Queen's speech relating to the Corn Laws be read by the clerk. This having

Spectator, February 12, 1842.

In the comments with which he concluded his speech there were some signs of progress in the development of free trade ideas in the mind of the perplexed and trammelled minister, which are interesting to read by the light of what is now known of his subsequent career. He still maintained, in deference to the views of those, who surrounded him, that it was the duty of the Legislature to take precautions to ensure that the main source of our supply of food should be derived from domestic agriculture; but he admitted that any protection, beyond what would compensate for the alleged special burdens upon agriculture, could only be vindicated on the ground that it was for the interest of all classes of the community. Mr. Cobden, who in the autumn of the

A.D. 1842.]

DISCONTENT OF THE COUNTRY AT THE SLIDING SCALE.

previous year had been returned for Stockport, said a few words after the speech. He declared himself not surprised at the position, constituted as the Government was; for he had not, he said, expected to gather grapes of thistles; but he denounced the sliding scale as an insult to a suffering people. Following him, Lord John Russell gave notice that he should move a resolution to the effect that it was not advisable in any alteration of the corn laws to adopt the principle of a graduated sliding scale; and Mr. Villiers gave notice that, on going into committee, he should take the sense of the House on the policy of imposing any duty whatever on the foreign corn or food imported into the country.

573

out a troop of dragoons. At Northampton the police rescued the counterfeit Sir Robert from the flames, and a riot ensued, which was not quelled until the soldiers were called out and about one hundred persons were arrested. In Parliament the position of the Minister was by no means an enviable one. The free-traders pressed him closely with questions which must have made him feel still more strongly the embarrassing part which he was compelled to play. Mr. Cobden, for instance, asked him whether he was going to lay before the House a specific statement of those peculiar burdens on land by which alone he had justified his measure of protection to the landowners. Sir Robert replied, The measure gave little satisfaction to the landowning evasively, that these burdens were matters of controversy, party, and still less to the people. The Minister's decla- and 'that even writers on political economy differed about ration of opinion, that the people did not want corn in them. Mr. Cobden then asked for a statement of what, ordinary years, and that they only wanted enough, and in the Minister's own opinion, constituted the alleged had better not have a surplus, sounded in the ears of burdens; to which Sir Robert replied, sharply, that earnest men like a cruel jest. It was asked, who was to honourable members usually delivered their opinions in judge when corn was wanted? who to decide when the their speeches. To a flood of other questions, the people who ate corn, had enough? The debate on Sir Minister could only reply that great inconvenience might Robert Peel's proposition began on Monday, the 14th of result from answering particular interrogatories of that February, and reached the close of its first stage on kind. In the House of Lords, the Corn Importation Wednesday, when Lord John Russell's motion was Bill was passed with slight opposition. Lord Brougham negatived by a majority of 123, in a House of 575. Mr. proposed a resolution in favour of a perfectly free trade Villiers's motion was debated for five nights more, in corn, which was negatived. A resolution, moved by and finally negatived by a majority of 393 to 90. The Lord Melbourne, in favour of a fixed duty, was also Whigs now gave the people to understand that the eight negatived by a majority of 117 to 49. Before this, howshilling duty of the year before was abandoned, and that ever, the financial statement for the year had been made, if they were again in power, they would propose a and for awhile the corn law question was suspended for lower sum. But the people were beginning to feel that the country to recover from its astonishment at finding all their plans of duty, old and new, meant only that in the Minister of the Conservative party one of the there should be less corn in England-less in the market, boldest reformers of our tariff who had ever occupied and less eaten by the people than if there were no duty the Ministerial benches. His position had only yesterat all. In the manufacturing towns the dissatisfaction | day appeared one of the greatest difficulty, in which a was wide-spread. A preliminary meeting of merchants cautious hold upon the established sources of revenue, and manufacturers, and tradesmen at Manchester, with some well-balanced proposals for additional taxes, agreed to a series of resolutions, energetically de- was all that could be expected. He had not the good nouncing the Ministerial scheme, and calling upon the fortune of Mr. Goulburn or Lord Althorp in having a representatives of the borough, and such other members surplus to dispose of. The Whig Government had of the House of Commons as considered themselves the bequeathed to their successors a deficit, which had been guardians of the rights of the people, to oppose by all increasing from year to year, with a revenue falling off the means with which the Constitution armed them, the even in the face of new taxes. How was the deficit to granting of any supplies to Her Majesty until such time be met was the question which filled the mouths of as the Corn Laws should have been totally and un- public men; a question which was answered by the conditionally repealed. At Salford a similar meeting famous financial statement of Sir Robert Peel on the was held. At Nottingham a large meeting, presided over 11th of March. by Lord Rankin, and at Staleybridge and Stockport, meetings passed resolutions condemnatory of the Government plan. In Manchester, Leicester, Rochdale, Huddersfield, Northampton, at Hawick in Scotland, Carnarvon, Derby, and at Hanley and Shelton in the Potteries, and many other towns, Sir R. Peel was burned in effigy. At the last place placards had been put up in several windows, bearing the words, "No more taxes will be paid here till the Corn Laws are repealed." At Derby some members of the Conservative party made oath before the magistrates during the burning of the representation of the Minister, that they considered their lives in danger, and the magistrates were induced to call

After showing that the deficiency for the coming year would be little short of £2,500,000, and that this deficiency might be expected to be considerably augmented by the position of affairs in India and China, the Minister declared that he would not consent to resort to the miserable expedient of continual loans. He declared that he would not attempt to impose burdens upon the labouring classes, and that if he did, recent experience had shown that they would be defeated. In fact, the country had arrived at the limits of taxation upon articles of consumption. After ridiculing the various suggestions of people who were constantly sending him projects for taxes on pianofortes, umbrellas, and other

French revolution-has been one of the most memorable periods that the history of the world will afford. I am now addressing you after the duration of peace for twenty-five years. I am now exhibiting to you the financial difficulties and embarrassments in which you are placed; and my confident hope and belief is, that following the example of those who preceded you, you will look those difficulties in the face, and not refuse to make similar sacrifices to those which your fathers made for the purpose of upholding the public credit. You will bear in mind that this is no casual and occasional difficulty. You will bear in mind that there are indications amongst all the upper classes of society of increased comfort and enjoyment-of increased prosperity and wealth-and that, concurrently with these indications, there exists a mighty evil which has been growing up for the last seven years, and which you are now called upon to meet. If you have, as I believe you have, the fortitude and constancy of which you have been set the example, you will not consent with folded arms to view the annual growth of this mighty evil. You will not reconcile it to your consciences to hope for relief from diminished taxation. You will not adopt the miserable expedient of adding, during peace, and in the midst of these indications of wealth and of increasing prosperity, to the burdens which posterity will be called upon to bear. You will not permit this evil to gain such gigantic growth as

articles, accompanied with claims of very large percentages upon the proceeds, he acknowledged the principle laid down by financiers that increased revenue may be obtained by taking off the taxes which pressed upon industry, but declared that the first effect was always a diminution in revenue, and that time was found necessary to restore the amount. Under these circumstances, he stated what the measure was which, under a deep conviction of its necessity, he was prepared to propose, and which, he was persuaded, would benefit the country, not only in her pecuniary interests, but in her security and character. His scheme was this: he proposed, for a period to be limited, an income tax of not more than 3 per cent., from which he would exempt all incomes under £150, and in which he would include not only landed but funded property. Rising then to the height of his subject, the Minister addressed the House in a strain of lofty appeal to great principles, which constitutes one of the most striking passages in his printed speeches. "There are," he said, "occasions when a Minister of the Crown may, consistently with honour and with good policy, pause before he presses upon the Legislature the adoption of measures which he believes to be abstractedly right. He may have to encounter differences of opinion amongst colleagues whom he esteems and respects. He may sincerely believe it to be for the public interest that the Government, of which he is a member, should retain power, and that, therefore, he should not hazard its existence by proposing a mea-ultimately to place it far beyond your power to check sure which might not ultimately succeed, and thereby endanger the safety and security of his Government. He may, on comparing the consequence of exciting and agitating the country by discussion upon a measure in which he may not ultimately succeed, think it possible that there is a disadvantage in proposing that which he believes to be abstractedly right, for the evil of fruitless agitation may possibly countervail the enunciation of a right principle. But there are occasions, and this is one of them, upon which a Government can make no compromise-there are occasions, and this is one of them, upon which it is the bounden duty of a Government to give that counsel to the Legislature which it believes to be right—to undertake the responsibility of proposing those measures which it believes to be for the public advantage, and to devolve upon the Legislature the responsibility of adopting or rejecting those mea

sures.

I have performed, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, my duty. I have proposed, with the full weight and authority of the Government, that which I believe to be conducive to the public welfare. I now devolve upon you the duty, which properly belongs to you, of maturely considering and finally deciding on the adoption or rejection of the measures I propose. We live in an important era of human affairs. There may be a natural tendency to overrate the magnitude of the crisis in which we live, or those particular events with which we are ourselves conversant; but I think it is impossible to deny that the period in which our lot and the lot of our fathers has been cast-the period which has elapsed since the first outbreak of the first

or control. If you do permit this evil to continue, you must expect the severe but just judgment of a reflecting and retrospective posterity. Your conduct will be contrasted with that of your fathers, under difficulties infinitely less pressing than theirs. Your conduct will be contrasted with that of your fathers, who, with a mutiny at the Nore, a rebellion in Ireland, and disaster abroad, yet submitted, with buoyant vigour and universal applause (with the funds as low as 52), to a property tax of ten per cent. I believe that you will not subject yourselves to an injurious or an unworthy contract. It is my firm belief that you will feel the necessity of preserving inviolate the public credit-that you will not throw away the means of maintaining the public credit by reducing in the most legitimate manner the burden of the public debt. My confident hope and belief is, that you will prove yourselves worthy of your mission-of your mission as the representatives of a mighty people; and that you will not tarnish the fame which it is your duty to cherish as the most glorious inheritance; that you will not impair the character for fortitude, for good faith, which, in proportion as the empire of opinion supersedes and predominates over the empire of physical force, constitutes for every people, but above all for the people of England, the main instrument by which to repel hostile aggressions, and maintain extended empire."

There is no reason to doubt that the Minister honestly believed that the income tax would be only a temporary measure. He had avowed his faith in the doctrines of the free-traders on the elasticity of taxes under remis

A.D. 1842.]

INTRODUCTION OF THE INCOME TAX.

575

operation. Add to this the vast injury to the morals of the people in the almost universal practice of making false returns, which has grown out of the fact that the Government are, in most cases, compelled to depend entirely on the consciences of the payers for their knowledge of the amount of their incomes. Many of these evils were pointed out at the time, and considerable opposition was manifested; but the splendour of the financial scheme, which was based upon the new impost, and the apparent impossibility of separating it from it, reconciled even some of the more advanced Liberal journals, which did not fail to sneer at the theorists who attempted to draw a distinction between incomes on the ground of the sources from which they were derived.

sion. The country had already seen the marvellous their incomes, find much difficulty in escaping from its effects of taking off excise duties, in setting free industry, and so increasing the amount derived from other taxed articles; and they had just had an evidence of the truth of the converse of that maxim in the unproductiveness of the additional rates imposed by Sir Francis Baring. It was, at all events, not the part of the free-traders to deny that the remissions of taxation which the income tax rendered possible would soon be made up, and thus the abolition of the income tax made easy. Subsequent events, indeed, have shown that those calculations were well founded; but the Minister forgot that the elasticity of the national expenditure is at least equal to that of the national income. Once imposed, the income tax was little likely to be parted with by future Chancellors of the Exchequer. If the expenditure of the country had remained at the point at which it stood in 1843, there would soon have been no difficulty in dispensing with this great burthen on the industrious classes. This was all the Minister promised, and the subsequent enormous increase in the estimates cannot fairly be regarded as showing the Premier's scheme to be erroneous.

Sir Robert Peel calculated that the tax would yield £3,350,000 a year, a sum which, with an addition to the spirit duties in Ireland, and an export duty of 4s. on coals, would not only cover the existing deficiency, but enable him to remit indirect taxes to the amount of £1,200,000. The sliding scale had brought little credit to the Minister, and the income tax was in its nature an unpopular measure; but the proposal to re

in the tariff—to remove prohibitions altogether (in itself a vast concession to free trade doctrines)—to reduce the duties on raw materials of manufactures to five per cent. or less-to keep the duties on articles partially manufactured under twelve per cent., and on articles wholly manufactured under twenty per cent., was a scheme which excited general admiration. The measure was, indeed, contested by the Whig Opposition at every stage. The preliminary resolutions were debated for eight nights. There were many of Sir Robert Peel's old supporters who looked on the financial plan with distrust, as being founded, in a great measure, avowedly on those principles of political economy which they had been accustomed to sneer at; but, in truth, it was not unfavourable to the interests of their party. We have already seen that the new tax-at least, if a temporary one-was calculated to impose a far greater burden upon the manufacturing and moneyed class than upon the landowners; in fact, by exempting incomes under £150 a year, and assessing land only upon its net rental, the burden was imposed almost entirely upon that middle class which was the especial object of the dislike of Tories of the more advanced kind. At the same time, by cheapening articles of general consumption, the Minister did something towards securing popu

It is curious, however, that this very temporary character which Sir Robert Peel put forth as the best re-duce the custom duties on 750 out of the 1,200 articles commendation of his scheme afforded one of the most powerful arguments against the tax. A complaint was immediately made against the injustice of taxing precarious and permanent incomes-the earnings of the clerk or professional man, which may cease at any moment, or the income of the annuitant, or holder of a terminable annuity-and the revenue of the landed proprietor or fundholder at the same rate. The supporters of the tax contended that this objection was fallacious, because where the income was precarious, the tax would be equally precarious, and would, in fact, exist only as long as the income existed. These two schools of reasoners have not yet come to agreement upon this point, very able writers even among political economists having adopted each view; but among the most thorough defenders of the tax there were none who could deny that their reasoning applied only to a permanent impost; and that a man who invested in a permanent security ought not to be allowed, as he was, to pay a great deal less per annum in proportion to his property than others who had invested in annuities or other precarious securities, except on the understanding, that while the latter paid only as long as their income should last, the former should pay for ever. On Sir Robert Peel's own showing, his tax must necessarily be grossly partial in its opera-larity among the working classes, who, as exemplified tion in favour of the landowner, the fundholder, and all other holders of settled incomes. In other respects, it could not be denied that the tax was extremely unfair. Unlike some indirect taxes, which reach all classes, it weighed and even now weighs heavily on the struggling industrious and most responsible portion of the population, to the almost complete exemption of the idle and profligate. In practice it has been found impossible to collect it with any approach to equality. Few persons, unless housekeepers, however large

in the Chartist agitation, were not always disposed to take part against the selfish schemes of the landowners. Sir James Graham, in his speech on the budget, said that the object of the Government was gradually to reduce the price of all articles of first necessity, and added, "I am persuaded that the working classes clearly understand this, and that it is a fixed and rooted belief with them that this tariff, taken in conjunction with the scheme of direct taxation, is one calculated to promote the interests of the great bulk of the community."